http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
Mueller, Wolf-Detrich,Koo B. Chin Korean Society for Food Science of Animal Resource 2003 한국축산식품학회지 Vol.23 No.4
The objectives of this study were to develop restructured meat products(RMPs) using a transgluta-minase(TGase) and to improve the textural characteristics of RMPs manufactured with pale, soft, exudative(PSE) pork hams. The pH values of RMPs with PSE and normal pork were 5.94 and 6.07, respectively, and their water activity value was approximately 0.981. The RMPs had 70∼72% moisture, 4∼5% fat, 19∼20% protein, and approximately 3% ash contents. No differences in pH, water activity, chemical composition, and hunter color values were observed between RMPs manufactured with normal and PSE pork(p>0.05). However, RMPs containing PSE pork hams had higher drip loss(%)(p>0.05) than those with normal pork hams after 10 days of refrigerated storage. Although no differences were observed in the texture profile analysis(TPA) hardness and sensory evaluation, RMPs with PSE pork hams tended to have more pores and lower binding capacity those with normal pork. This result indicated that additional substrates or longer tumbling time(>4 hr) for the manufacture of RMPs containing PSE pork were required for the products to have similar palatability to those with normal pork.
Theater der Potentialität -Brecht, Benjamin und das experimentelle Theater der Gegenwart-
Nikolaus Mueller-Schoell 한국브레히트학회 2013 브레히트와 현대연극 Vol.0 No.29
베르톨트 브레히트와 발터 벤야민이 1926년과 1933년 사이에 제시한 연극이론과 연극의 현재성이란 어디에 근거하는 것일까? 발터 벤야민의 「브레히트에 대한 시도」가 출간되고, 하이너 뮐러가 교훈극을 재발견했을 당시인 60년대 말 브레히트에게 남겨진 것은 무엇인가? 지난 세기 연극 및 문예학자들이 현대연극 및 이론논쟁에 새롭게 들고 왔던 ‘또 다른 브레히트’의 현재성이란 과연 무엇인가?본 논문은 브레히트와 벤야민을 중심으로 이러한 질문들에 대한 답을 규명해 보고자 한다. 주제적인 측면에서 본 논문은 크게 세 부분으로 나누어진다. 1. 1926년 브레히트의 서사극에서 1930년대 교훈극에 이르기까지 가능성에 대한 또 다른 생각이 브레히트의 연극의 발전단계를 결정하고 있다는 점이다. 2. 브레히트와 마찬가지로 벤야민에게 있어서 실제적은 것은 현대 실험극과 연관되어 있으며, 이는 미셀 푸코와 조르조 아감벤의 입장에서 볼 때 연극의 ‘장치’에 관한 논쟁이라 할 수 있다. 3. 앞에서 제기한 논쟁들을 현대연극의 새로운 사례들을 통해 알아보는 것이다. 우선, “모방성의 연극에 관한 발터 벤야민의 이론”이라고 제목이 붙은 첫 번째 부분에서는 브레히트의 서사극에 관한 벤야민의 이론을 그의 역사의 개념과 연관해서 고찰하고 있다. 벤야민의 시각에서 볼 때, 브레히트의 서사극은 현재에는 실현될 수 없지만 언제든지 계속해서 일어날 수 있는 잠재성의 연극으로서 이해될 수 있다. “대중과 국가 - 서사극에서 교훈극까지”라는 제목이 붙은 두 번째 부분에서는 벤야민이 제시한 잠재성의 연극을 중심으로 1926년 브레히트의 서사극에서부터 1930년대 그의 교훈극에 이르기까지 브레히트의 연극에 나타난 잠재성의 요소를 고찰하고 있다. “잠재성의 연극으로서의 오늘날의 형식들 - 재현의 장치에 관한 논쟁들”이라고 제목이 붙은 세 번째 부분에서는 브레히트와 벤야민이 제시한 잠재성의 연극은 미셀 푸코와 조르조 아감벤의 ‘장치’의 개념과 밀접히 연관되어 있으며, 연극에서 나타나는 장치적 특징을 현대연극의 새로운 사례들을 중심으로 살펴보고 있다.
Antiproliferation Policy as a Hindrance to Resolving Korea : Some Policy Proposals
John Mueller 국방대학교 국가안전보장문제연구소 2019 The Korean Journal of Security Affairs Vol.24 No.2
Although alarmed antiproliferation efforts have proved to be exceedingly costly, leading to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, the consequences of nuclear proliferation itself have been substantially benign: those who have acquired the weapons have “used” them simply to stoke their egos or to deter real or imagined threats. It therefore doesn’t really matter much whether North Korea has nuclear weapons or not. However, the obsession about proliferation potentially stands in the way of an extremely important development. It is entirely possible (but not certain) that Korea is at a historic turning point: because North Korean leader Kim Jong-un seems to be genuine about wanting to see his country become developed, there is a good prospect of forging a potentially permanent normalization of relations on the peninsula. This would markedly reduce the prospect of armed conflict there while finally relieving the perpetual suffering of the North Korean people. Accordingly, policy should involve backburnering the nuclear issue, actively exploring the possibilities for normalization, relaxing or removing the sanctions, letting South Korea take the lead, and waiting.
G. Mueller,W. An,Th. Berghofer,M. DelGiacco,Ch. Eing,R. Fetzer,B. Flickinger,W. Frey,H. Giese,M. Gottel,Ch. Gusbeth,A. Heinzel,P. Hoppe,A. Jianu,F. Lang,K. Leber,M. Sack,G. Schuhmacher,J. Singer,R. St 한국물리학회 2011 THE JOURNAL OF THE KOREAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY Vol.59 No.61
In this paper, we review the progress that has been achieved at Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) for several industrial scale projects and in basic investigations based on intense particle beams and pulsed power technologies.
The Limitations of Tax Law Interpretation in Germany
Sebastian Mueller-Franken 한국국제조세협회 2014 조세학술논집 Vol.30 No.2
Tax laws are interpreted with the same methods as other laws. The general canon of interpreting methods so applies. The most important and substantial principle of taxation in Germany is the ability to pay principle; it has to be regarded by the interpreter. In the case of a difference between the interpretation of the wording and the interpretation of the purpose in Germany the answer as to which interpretation of tax law is more important is differentiated. If the wording and the purpose of a law differ from one another, the purpose of the law takes priority, if it is somehow compatible with the wording. If the wording and the purpose are incompatible with each other the question whether there exists an “interpretation against the wording” arises. The Federal Finance Court considers this possible. But this is rather a question of the judicial development of the law?and then according to its own requirements and limits. An interpretation of a statute in a way that is contrary to its wording is basically prohibited. But this assertion is only the policy. The Federal Finance Court holds that as an exception the interpreter may interpret a statute against its wording if the exact interpretation of the wording is contrary to the sense intended or if otherwise accepted ways of interpretation require it. Outer limitations accordingly are those limitations which derive from outside the body of the law. Under this aspect the interpretation also finds its limit in higher ranked law: the interpretation for the Member States of the European Union like Germany ends with the provisions of the Union Law. The limit of the interpretation of tax law can also be found in the public international law. Finaly the interpretation of tax law finds - like the interpretation of every other law too?its limits first and foremost in the constitution. If the interpretation of a tax law leads to a result that contradicts the constitution it is no allowed to take this result as a basis. The law applicant must choose an interpretation that is in accordance with the constitution instead.